The same product, engineered to cost what it should.
Re-engineering an existing product for margin, manufacturability or part availability: bill-of-materials analysis, component alternatives, design simplification and requalification planning.
Why products end up costing more than they should
Rarely through carelessness. A first design is optimised for getting to market, which is the correct priority at the time. Parts are chosen because they were available, familiar or already in the drawer. Margins are added where behaviour was uncertain. Volumes were guesses.
Then the product succeeds, volumes rise, and every one of those early decisions is being paid for on every unit shipped. Separately, parts go end-of-life, lead times stretch, and a design that was fine becomes a supply problem.
Where the cost usually sits
- Over-specified components. Parts rated well beyond the actual operating conditions, often chosen when those conditions were still unknown.
- Part count. Every component carries a placement cost, a procurement cost and a failure opportunity. Consolidation and integration reduce all three.
- Board area and layer count. Both are direct cost, and both are frequently set by a layout that was never revisited.
- Assembly and test time. Manual steps, fiddly connectors, hand-soldered parts and slow test sequences that were acceptable at low volume.
- Single sourcing. Which is a cost and a risk at once, because it removes negotiating position and leaves nothing to fall back on.
- Yield. Units that need rework are often a larger cost than the bill of materials suggests, and are frequently invisible in the cost model.
How we help
- Cost teardown. Analysing the bill of materials, board, assembly and test against what the product actually has to do, and ranking opportunities by saving against effort and risk.
- Component rationalisation. Identifying alternates and second sources, and where a part is genuinely over-specified, with the engineering reasoning recorded rather than assumed.
- Design simplification. Consolidating functions, reducing part count, and removing circuitry that history has shown is not needed.
- Layout revision. Area and layer reduction where the constraints allow it. See hardware and PCB design.
- Design for manufacture and test. Making assembly faster and faults detectable earlier, which usually pays back more than component substitution.
- Obsolescence response. When a part goes end-of-life, assessing replacements and the change each one forces.
- Requalification planning. Working out what testing each change triggers, so savings are not wiped out by an unexpected retest.
The part people underestimate
Changes have consequences beyond the component price. A different regulator shifts thermal behaviour. A cheaper connector changes mechanical fit. A layout revision can affect emissions and may require retesting; see EMC and compliance readiness. A firmware-visible part change needs firmware work and a field update path.
We assess these before recommending a change, and we say when a saving is not worth what it triggers. A redesign that saves a little per unit and costs a requalification cycle is not a saving.
What you receive
A ranked list of opportunities with estimated saving, engineering effort, risk and any requalification implications. Then, for the changes you approve, the revised design, updated documentation and support through the transition to the new build.
Related
Industrial product development, prototype to production, hardware and PCB design.
What are you building today?
Tell us roughly what the product is, your current volumes, and whether the pressure is margin, a part going end-of-life, or supply reliability.
What clients ask before starting
How much can we expect to save?
That cannot be answered responsibly before looking at the design. After a teardown we give you a ranked list of opportunities with estimated saving, engineering effort, risk and any requalification each one triggers, so you can decide what is worth doing.
Will changes mean retesting the product?
Possibly, and that is assessed before anything is recommended. A layout revision can affect emissions and may require retesting. A saving that triggers a requalification cycle is often not a saving at all, and we will say so.
A component has gone end-of-life. Can you help?
Yes. That covers assessing candidate replacements, understanding what each one changes electrically, thermally and mechanically, and identifying what testing the substitution requires.